RANT: “Justice”, marriage, and licensing

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GAY_MARRIAGE_TRIAL?
SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-06-14-03-07-03

Jun 15, 3:11 AM EDT
Gay judge’s same-sex marriage ruling upheld
By LISA LEFF Associated Press

*** begin quote ***

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge has a message for those trying to salvage California’s gay marriage ban: Sure, the judge who threw out the measure last year is in a long-term relationship with a man, but he could still be fair to them.

Chief U.S. District Court Judge James Ware’s ruling Tuesday rejected arguments that former Chief Judge Vaughn Walker would potentially benefit from declaring the ban unconstitutional.

*** end quote ***

Sure, and you expected “justice” from a Gooferment court.

Then why was the judge’s home life kept secret?

You know that if it had been “out”, it would have been all over the press.

I “don’t have a dog in this fight” because as a little L libertarian I tout that the Goofermentshould have NO role in marriage.

Ann Coulter was on O’Reilly last night blathering about how “marriage has thousands of legal consequences” as if that justifies Gooferment intrusion into marriage.

Circular reasoning!

Gooferment “gives” marriage financial benefits, therefore it must “regulate” marriage.

The only reason we are in this problem is the racist “marriage license” laws in the first place.

Prior to the Welfare / Warfare state, when taxes were low and government didn’t intrude, there was no need for a Gooferment “license”!

Ron Paul said it in the Tuesday night Republican Presidential debate, leave marriage to the Churches and the People.

Unless it’s about control and plunder.

Argh!

If the Gooferment wants, let it treat the “family” as a Subchapter S corporation. Them’s that want to be a Gooferment corporation and get tax benefits of such “incorporation”, let them volunteer.

Of course, that would highlight the Gooferment trying to pick winners and losers by bribing them with taxpayer money.

And why do we allow that and let them pander to the electorate that they are “pro-famiiy”?

“We, The Sheeple”

# # # # #

POLITICAL: BHO44’s proffered “certificate” is fraud; is it a felony?

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=308397

A QUESTION OF ELIGIBILITY
Expert: Obama doc is ‘proof’ – of fraud
Typeface analysis shows images come from different machines
Posted: June 07, 2011
8:28 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi

*** begin quote ***

“Typewriters in 1961 could not change the size and shape of a letter on the fly like that,” he said. “This document is definitely a forgery.”

*** end quote ***

This is the “show”; no longer a “sideshow”.

Why?

What’s so embarrassing in all the documents that are being suppressed?

# # # # #